Tofin v. Spadina Condominium Corporation (Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench)

09/07/13 – Jurisdiction Saskatchewan
Part 35 published on 01/09/11
Court will defer to Board’s interpretation of by-law, unless the Board’s interpretation is unreasonable. Also, principles of contract interpretation did not apply

This was a dispute about the election voting rights of the commercial owners in the condominium.  The applicant, an owner and former Board member, asserted that the Board’s interpretation of the corporation’s by-law (on these matters) was wrong.  According to the applicant, the by-law, when prepared and passed, was intended to achieve a different result than had been determined by the Board. 

The Court supported the Board’s interpretation of the by-law.  In doing so, the Court said that it should defer to the Board’s interpretation so long as this interpretation was reasonable.  The Court said that the test is not whether the Board has properly or correctly interpreted the by-law.  On that issue, the Court said: 

Although the applicant argued that the appropriate standard of review is correctness, the Court is not prepared to accept that proposition.  The appropriate standard of review is reasonableness. 

 The court also compared contract interpretation with condominium by-law interpretation: 

The Court has concluded that principles of contract interpretation have no place within the scope of the within application, being the interpretation of a condominium by-law.  This process is not analogous to the interpretation of a contract.  The owners of condominiums within a condominium corporation are not in the same position as the parties to a specific contract.

 

As such, this Court is not prepared to consider the arguments of the applicant’s counsel with regard to the intent of the applicant at the time the by-laws were enacted or apply other principles of contract interpretation in determining whether the Board’s interpretation of (the by-law) was reasonable.